The Hawaiian gazette. [volume] (Honolulu [Oahu, Hawaii]) 1865-1918, 1887-12-20

The impression produced by an
ungracious act may be either mater
tally aggravated or mitigated by the
manner of the doing. A man may
occasionally find himself in a posi-
ton where he feels it his duty to do
disagreeable thing something which
is likely to ALLEVIATE him from those
whose friendship he desires to enjoy
or offend those whose goodwill it is
important for him to retain. In such
cases, considerations of good man
ners and good policy will concur
in debating that the unpleasant act
be shorn of all needlessly exasper-
ating accomplishments. Every care
should be taken that it appear to be
done without malice, solely from a
sense of duty, and with due consider
alton for those whose interests or
whose susceptibilities may be affected
thereby. If this is true with refer
ence to the ordinary conduct of af-
fairs, the same considerations are still
more imperatively binding in the
case of King whose relations with
his people have recently been strained
to the EXTREMIST degree of tension
consistent with any further continu-
ance of the relations of Sovereign
and subjects, and who has only saved
himself from the consequences of
open, armed resistance by prompt
and wholesale concessions. For
ruler so situated, to put him
self voluntarily in position of open
antagonism to the clearly expressed
wishes of the representatives of the
people is, at the best, an act of ex
treme folly and danger; for him to
do so with gratuitous discourtesy and
an ostentatious disregard of the pro-
prieties of official intercourse, is a
blhnder little short of crime. Leay-
ing out of account entirely the wisdom
Of the bills to which the King has
seen fit to refuse his assent, and pass
ing by for the present all merely
technical questions Of constitutional
Interpretation, we regret to see that
His Majesty has not only done a
highly improper act, but has done it
in a conspicuously discourteous and
offensive manner. Having been adj
vised by the whole Cabinet to sign
these as well as all other bills which
have been passed, having signifed
his intention of following their adj
vice, and having never in any way
intimated any change of purpose, he
suddenly dumps his veto message
upon the table of the House. Had
the King seen any reason to differ
with his Ministers with reference to
the merits Of these bills, or had he
wished for any cause to withhold his
signature, common courtesy, to say
nothing of the claims of official Ell
quette, imperatively demanded that
his responsible advisers should be
notified of his intentions, and an OPP
portunity afforded for such compari-
son of views as might possibly remove
any honest difference of opinion.
The King cannot complain if his con
duct receives that construction which
seems most natural and obvious, viz:
that he either intended to snub his
Ministers and defy the Legislature,
or else that he is ignorant of or in
different to the claims of good man
ners. For the first time in a number
of years we have a Ministry who
respect themselves and their posi-
tions, and a Legislature, majority of
whose members appear to know their
rights and have the courage to main
tain them. We feel that the issue
can be safely left in their hands.